News-Record.com

Ted Gup bemoans the disengagement of college students with current events in the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Nearly half of a recent class could not name a single country that bordered Israel. In an introductory journalism class, 11 of 18 students could not name what country Kabul was in, although we have been at war there for half a decade. Last fall only one in 21 students could name the U.S. secretary of defense. Given a list of four countries -- China, Cuba, India, and Japan -- not one of those same 21 students could identify India and Japan as democracies. Their grasp of history was little better. The question of when the Civil War was fought invited an array of responses -- half a dozen were off by a decade or more. Some students thought that Islam was the principal religion of South America, that Roe v. Wade was about slavery, that 50 justices sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, that the atom bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1975.

He adds:

It is not easy to explain how we got into this sad state, or to separate symptoms from causes. Newspaper readership is in steep decline. My students simply do not read newspapers, online or otherwise, and many grew up in households that did not subscribe to a paper.

An oldtimer complaining about "these kids today?" I asked some journalism instructors who work here or used to work here for their observations.

Former managing editor Ned Cline: Sadly, based on my experiences in the classroom, today's students seldom if ever read newspapers. A few look a topics of interest on internet, but my classroom discussions indicate they do not follow local newspapers beyond what is required in class, even then begrudgingly and only enough to get by. Every week, I ask for news since last class and they seldom know beyond sports (males) or some rock star dying. And these are students with an interest in journalism (in theory). It is not a pleasant thought or much hope for future of newsrooms.

Editorial page editor Allen Johnson: I keep them honest with current events pop quizzes. I also require them to learn the names of local and state elected officials. Otherwise they are blissfully unaware of even the biggest national stories. However, once we get them engaged they seem to become more interested, and even thoughtful, in discussing the issues.

I believe them and sympathize with their frustration as teachers. But I'm struggling with the idea that this is something worth wringing my hands over. Or that it is a new phenomenon.

When I was in college in the early 70s, I read newspapers in the college library primarily to pass the time between classes and to procrastinate doing real work. I followed Watergate, but not the Middle East. I followed the Patty Hearst kidnapping and Jeffrey MacDonald case, but not the oil embargo or the SALT agreement.

So, really, tabloid crime, but not anything actually important. (Well, there was that Watergate caper. I guess that turned out to be important, but it was tabloid drama, too.) I can't imagine that I or any of my friends would have passed any of Allen's tests without studying. It wasn't until I began working for a newspaper that I tuned into the world beyond my own neighborhood of interests.

Fast forward to today. We don't hire many journalists straight out of college, but the ones we do either are tuned in, or more important, know how to get up to speed quickly. And that, I think, is the key.

Back in the day, if you wanted information, you went to the newspaper or weekly magazines, selected from one, two or three television stations, or buried yourself in back issues and Reader's Guides at the library. Now, information is available everywhere at anytime. There is no real need to constantly keep up, outside of personal interest, when you can catch up at a moment's notice. I have observed it in my own college-age children.

I think the problem is ours, not theirs. The sooner we understand the "news will find me" generation, the better.